additional means of annoying us; and that all these means will be diminished by the revolutions she may suffer in another war. If she should suffer in the next war ten revolutions, instead of the five or six through which she struggled in the last, putting all other considerations out of the question, are we justified by experience in expecting that her sufferings will render her a better neighbour to us, or less troublesome to the repose of the world? Was she so wasted by the losses of the late war, was she so enervated by the calamities of her revolutions, as to be rendered incapable of annoying others, or of defending herself? Were not her last efforts, on the contrary, the most terrible and the most successful ? '

"From these grounds," which Mr. Fox recapitulated, "he drew the conclusion, that we were in a situation in which, if we were to proceed on our present narrow ground of mere local British interest, we had nothing to gain; absolutely nothing. We could not hope for an ally from any quarter of the world. But if the House should agree to the amendment moved on the address, it would open to us another and a better course. The amendment contained nothing which, with the exception of a very few words indeed, they did not all believe to be true. That his Majesty's Ministers had not done the best that could have been done, in the whole of the negotiation, was certainly a very general opinion. That question was by common consent (as it appeared) to be the subject of debate at a future day; the address he thought would prejudge that question; whereas the amendment kept it entirely open for discussion and decision. To attain the greater objects of the amendment, he gave notice, that he should, at no very distant period, move the House to address his Majesty to avail himself of the disposition manifested by the Emperor of Russia to bring about a general peace.* If that Prince should either be unwilling to engage in the mediation, or unable, through the fault of our enemy, to accomplish its purpose, neither of which he could believe, the House would enjoy the satisfaction of reflecting that they had done everything in their power, which prudence could dictate, to avoid the calamities of war. The alternative would then be inevitable, and they would adopt it without reproach. At present nothing could be said in favour of the policy of war, but that it may be better for us now than it would be four months hence. This advantage would be more than counterbalanced by proving to all Europe, that war was not our choice; that we had applied to one of its first powers to prevent it, and that we were ready to accept the proffered mediation. He concluded his speech with stating the strong sense of duty, and the deep anxiety of mind under which he had been impelled to deliver his opinions so much at length; and with exhorting the House, before they entered on this great contest, not only to pause, to deliberate, and to satisfy themselves, but to do everything that depended on

This Mr. Fox did on the 27th of March; but, in consequence of Lord Hawkesbury having assured the House that the British Government was ready to accept the mediation of Russia, Mr. Fox withdrew his motion.

them to convince their constituents and all Europe that the avoiding it was impossible."

On a division, Mr. Grey's amendment was negatived by 398 against 67. After which the original address was agreed to.

PROCEEDINGS RESPECTING LORD MELVILLE.

1805. April 8. In the year 1803, an act* was passed, under the auspices of the Earl of St. Vincent, then First Lord of the Admiralty, for appointing commissioners, with power to examine on oath, to inquire into the abuses of the naval department, and to report such observations as should occur to them for preventing such abuses. The Tenth Report of this commission having implicated, in a very serious manner, the conduct of Lord Melville, who had for many years held the office of Treasurer of the Navy, holding it even with the seals of Secretary of State, Mr. Whitbread, on the 8th of April, brought that report under the consideration of the House, in a speech of considerable length. He concluded with moving the following resolutions:"1. That it appears to this committee, that on the 18th of June, 1782, the House of Commons, in a committee of the whole House, came, amongst others, to the following resolutions: That it is the opinion of this committee, that some regulations ought to be adopted for the purpose of lessening and keeping down the balances of public money, which appear to have usually been in the hands of the Treasurer of the Navy; and it would be beneficial to the public if the first and other clerks in the different branches belonging to the said office, were paid by fixed and permanent salaries in lieu of all fees, gratuities, and other perquisites whatsoever.'

"That it is the opinion of this committee, that from henceforward the Paymaster-General of his Majesty's Land Forces, and the Treasurer of the Navy for the time being, shall not apply any sum or sums of money imprested to them, or either of them, to any purpose of advantage or interest to themselves, either directly or indirectly.'

"That it appears to this committee, that the commissioners appointed to examine, take, and state the public accounts of the kingdom, have, so far as appears from the reports which they have hitherto made, discharged the duty entrusted to them with great diligence, accuracy, and ability; and if Parliament shall carry into execution those plans of reform and regulation which are suggested by the matter contained in the reports of the said commissioners, it cannot but be attended with the most beneficial consequences to the future welfare and prosperity of this kingdom.'

"2. That in furtherance of the intention of the House of Commons expressed in such resolutions, his Majesty, by his warrant, dated June 26th, 1782, directed that the salary of the Treasurer of the Navy should be increased to the sum of four thousand pounds per annum, in full satisfaction

* 43 Geo. III. c. 16

6

of all wages, and fees, and other profits and emoluments theretofore enjoyed by former Treasurers.

"3. That it appears to this committee, that during the treasurership of the right honourable Isaac Barré, the conditions of the aforesaid warrant were strictly complied with; that the whole of the money issued from the Exchequer to Mr. Barré, for naval services, was lodged in the Bank; that it was never drawn from thence previously to its being advanced to the subaccountants, to be applied to the public service; that during the time Mr. Barré acted as treasurer and ex-treasurer, he had not in his possession or custody any of the public money; and that neither he nor the Paymaster of the Navy did derive any profit or advantage from the use or employment thereof.

"4. That the right honourable Henry Dundas, now Lord Viscount Melville, succeeded to the office of Treasurer of the Navy on the 19th of August, 1782, when a further addition was made to the salary of the said office, in order to produce a net annual income of four thousand pounds, after the payment of all taxes and charges on the same; and that this additional salary was considered by the said Lord Viscount Melville as granted to him in lieu of all wages, fees, profits, and other emoluments, enjoyed by former

treasurers.

“5. That the said Lord Viscount Melville continued in the said office till the 10th of April, 1783; that being asked whether he derived any advantage from the use of the public money during that period, he, in his examination before the commissioners of naval inquiry, declined answering any question on that head, but that he has since, in a letter written to the said commissioners, and dated the 28th of March last, declared that previous to 1786, ⚫ he did not derive any advantage from the use or employment of any monies issued for carrying on the service of the navy;' but Mr. Douglas, who was paymaster, being dead, and his lordship having refused to answer any question on this head as aforesaid, no evidence has been obtained as to the application of monies issued for the service of the navy, or the mode of drawing the same from the Bank during this period.

"6. That the honourable C. Townshend, now Lord Bayning, held the office of Treasurer of the Navy from the 11th of April, 1783, to the 4th of January, 1784, and that from the examination of his lordship, it appears that, during his treasurership, no part of the money issued for the service of the navy was applied for his private use or advantage, and that he does not believe that Mr. Douglas, who acted under him as paymaster, derived any profit or advantage from the use or employment of the public money except the money issued for the payment of exchequer fees.

"7. That the right honourable Henry Dundas was re-appointed Treasurer of the Navy on the 5th of January, 1784, and continued in the said office until the 1st of June, 1800.

8. That in the year 1785, an Act of Parliament was passed, 25 Geo. III. c. 31, intituled, An Act for better regulating the Office of Treasurer of his

Majesty's Navy;' whereby it is directed that no money shall be issued from the Treasury to the Treasurers of the Navy; but that all monies issued for naval services shall be paid to the Bank on account of naval services, and placed to the account of the Treasurer of the Navy, and shall not be paid out of the Bank unless for naval services, and in pursuance of draughts signed by the Treasurer, or some person or persons authorized by him; which draughts shall specify the heads of service to which such sums are to be applied; and that the regulations under the said act shall take place from the 31st of July, 1785.

"9. That the execution of the said act was postponed till the month of January, 1786, and from that time till the month of June, 1800, when Lord Melville left the office of Treasurer, contrary to the practice established in the treasurership of the right honourable Isaac Barré, contrary to the resolutions of the House of Commons of 18th of June, 1782, and in defiance of the provisions of the above-mentioned act of the 25th of Geo. III. c. 31, large sums of money were, under pretence of naval services, and by a scandalous evasion of the act, at various times drawn from the Bank and invested in exchequer and navy bills, lent upon the security of stock, employed in discounting private bills, in purchasing Bank and East India stock, and used in various ways for the purposes of private emolument.

"10. That Alexander Trotter, Esq., Paymaster of the Navy, was the person by whom, or in whose name, the public money was thus employed, and that in so doing he acted with the knowledge and consent of Lord Viscount Melville; to whom he was at the same time private agent, and for whose use or benefit he occasionally laid out from ten to twenty thousand pounds, without considering whether he was previously in advance to his lordship, and whether such advances were made from his public or private balances.

"11. That the right honourable Lord Viscount Melville having been privy to, and connived at the withdrawing from the Bank of England, for purposes of private interest or emolument, sums issued to him as Treasurer of the Navy, and placed to his account in the Bank, according to the provisions of the 25th Geo. III. c. 31, has been guilty of a gross violation of the law, and a high breach of duty.

"12. That it further appears, that, subsequent to the appointment of Lord Melville, as Treasurer of the Navy, in 1784, and during the time he held that office, large sums of money issued for the service of the navy, were applied to other services; and that the said Lord Melville, in a letter, written in answer to a precept issued by the commissioners of naval inquiry, requiring an account of money received by him, or any person on his account, or by his order, from the Paymaster of the Navy, and also of the time when, and the persons by whom the same were returned to the banks, or Paymaster, has declared, that he has no materials by which he could make up such an account, and that if he had materials, he could not do it without disclosing delicate and confidential transactions of Government, which his duty to the public must have restrained him from revealing.

“13. That Lord Melville, in applying monies issued for the service of the navy to other services, stated to have been of so delicate and confidential a nature, that, in his opinion, no account can or ought to be given of them, has acted in a manner inconsistent with his duty, and incompatible with those securities which the legislature has provided for the proper application of the public money."

The first resolution being put, Mr. Pitt moved the previous question thereon. After the resolution had been supported by Lord Henry Petty, Mr. Tierney, and Mr. Ponsonby; and opposed by the Attorney-General, Mr. Canning, and the Master of the Rolls,

Mr. Fox said," he should be extremely unwilling to suffer this question to be put without expressing his sentiments upon it. For if, unhappily, the vote of the House should be opposite to that which he hoped and wished, he should feel very uneasy indeed that his name should partake of the universal odium that must attach to any decision tending to second such notorious delinquency as the report on the table exposed. He could never reconcile it to his mind to be silent upon such an occasion, lest he should be suspected of declining to mark with the strongest reprobation guilt of a nature so glaring, that any man who gave it the sanction of his vote, or attempted to protect it from punishment, must be viewed in the light of an accomplice, or one at least disposed to become the accomplice of similar transactions. Before he proceeded to the merits of the charges under consideration, he thought it proper to notice the arguments of the gentlemen on the other side, not because he considered those arguments possessed of any intrinsic force, but lest, from the authority of the persons from whom they proceeded they might have the effect of leading the House to a decision, which if it should correspond with the wishes of those by whom such arguments were used, must destroy its character with the country and with all Europe. The first gentleman with whom he would begin was the Master of the Rolls. That learned gentleman had directed the whole of his observations to show that the House should go into a committee in order to ascertain whether the breach of the Act of Parliament, not of which Lord Melville stood charged, but of which he confessed himself guilty, proceeded from corrupt motives. If corruption consisted merely in a man putting money into his own pocket, according to the vulgar conception, perhaps some of the deductions of the learned gentleman would be right. But he would contend that nothing could be more corrupt, in his opinion, than to permit a man's own agent to convert the money of others to his own private emolument. This was the amount of Lord Melville's confession; and although it might be possible, from a further examination, to prove the noble lord more guilty, it did appear to him utterly impossible to prove him less so. For the most conclusive evidence of the noble lord's corruption, he would only refer to that paragraph in the report, in which the noble lord stated, that, although he knew his agent Trotter was applying the public money to other purposes than that for